Rack and Ruin for blue

[Matt]

I Win Counterwars
{U}
Instant
Counter two target spells.

Should be fun.  Can't be used if there's only  one spell  on the stack, so it's not broken. And, like it says, it wins counterwars.

[Matt]

Current wording:

Stymie
{U}{U}
Instant
Counter two target spells.

[Jacob Orlove]

This should probably have some kind of "cards can't target themselves" reminder text.

[LordHomerCat]

Also, it seems to me in counterwars, this is just as useful as a regular counterspell (since, well, if they dont have another counter, you win anyway whether this is a normal Counterspell or what have you, and if they DO have another counter, they can just counter this spell...).  Pretty much the only times it would be useful are... uhm, if they stack two spells for some reason, or 2 storm copies, or something?

[Nova442]

So it's a counter that can only be used in counter wars or if your opponent stacks one spell on top of another.  It's new design space for sure, and I think it limits itself in such a way that it can't really be "broken".  For one thing it will never counter sorcery-speed spells unless you throw an instant out to counter (making it 2 for 1, plus extra mana).

I say go for it.  I think it's odd that the more spells it counters the worse it is, but this is the greatest newb identifier card I've seen in a while.  "I have to play this, it counters 2 spells not one for the same price"!  The wording is elegant, and it makes it seem like the card is good when really it sucks harder than a hoover vacuum cleaner 

[TheWellknownBrownie]

This could be U no problem.

[Matt]

I want to keep it at UU for exactly the reason Nova identified - skill testing. I want it to remind bad players of Counterspell.

I hadn't thought about the fact that it's not actually that good in counterwars. Name changed.

[TheWellknownBrownie]

Ummm.... explain how it can only be used under the circumstances Nova said?

[Machinus]

Actually, this spell isn't so bad. Often in control mirrors, players will respond to threats with draw spells. Trying to shut down the opponent's threat/draw as well as their disruption could be very valuable. You would have to play the deck really differently though, by playing draw spells first. Anyway, even then it would still only be good in heavily blue-based control mirrors.

[dandan]

I think this card is fine. It sucks mightily in regular formats but just might be interesting in multiplayer (stops that broken Arcane Denial thing for a start).

I might be tempted to give it cycling (but sucky like Cycling 4) as a way of getting it out of your hand. Hell, give it Storm and let it actually win those counterwars.

P.S. Have you noticed how the old-timers here used to submit powerful cards and now we submit weak cards or cards that do nothing at all?

[brianb]

How about counter two target spells or effects?  If your intention is not just to make it suck, letting it hit effects (maybe just activated effects) would make it very interesting.

[Machinus]

I was going to suggest that brianb, but that really would make the card REALLY broken. This card definitely couldn't do that unless it cost at least 3.

[brianb]

What if it only hit spells or effects controled by your opponent?  Then you couldn't just put a throwaway effect on the stack and use it to counter something.  It could only stop opponents who stack their effects.

[TheWellknownBrownie]

"Broken" in this case meaning, "almost sort of marginally playable- kind of."

[Machinus]

"Broken" in this case meaning, "almost sort of marginally playable- kind of."

Goblin Welder, Polluted Delta, Wasteland, Bazaar of Baghdad, Seal of Cleansing, Nevinyrral's Disk, Pernicious Deed, Powder Keg, Illusionary Mask, Goblin Charbelcher, Food Chain, Ophidian, Arrogant Wurm, Mindslaver. (If you were thinking about triggered abilities: Smokestack, Tangle Wire, Oath of Druids, Tendrils of Agony, Sundering Titan, Gaea's Blessing.)

It would be nigh impossible to get any spell plus any of these on the stack at the same time. Or two spells. Or two of these.

[Matt]

I'm not willing to include any kind of abilities, but I should point out that Ophidian is now a triggered ability, not activated.

[asmoranomardicodais]

You could make it:

Counter target spell and counter target activated or triggered ability

Then it would be more like lunge.
As another wacky idea, you could make it a mini-cycle, and have:

Four Counter's are better than one!
U
Instant
Counter four target spells.

and:

Beat that Tendrils!
UUU
Instant
Counter everything on the stack. This may not be responded to.

[TheWellknownBrownie]

"Broken" in this case meaning, "almost sort of marginally playable- kind of."

Goblin Welder, Polluted Delta, Wasteland, Bazaar of Baghdad, Seal of Cleansing, Nevinyrral's Disk, Pernicious Deed, Powder Keg, Illusionary Mask, Goblin Charbelcher, Food Chain, Ophidian, Arrogant Wurm, Mindslaver. (If you were thinking about triggered abilities: Smokestack, Tangle Wire, Oath of Druids, Tendrils of Agony, Sundering Titan, Gaea's Blessing.)

It would be nigh impossible to get any spell plus any of these on the stack at the same time. Or two spells. Or two of these.

You just argued against your case. 'Nigh' means 'close', or, 'almost'.

That being said, it would be easy to get two abilities on the stack, yes. But what you want to do in this case is convince your opponent to stack two spells or abilities, usually with no good reason. Not so easy. Not such a good idea to run a narrow card for the few times it'll happen.


I think the current version is fine if all you want is a skill-testing bad card.

[brianb]

If you're going to do a blue rack and ruin, why not use rack and ruin's cost

For 2U, you could have it target two spells and/or abilities.

For 2U plus putting your own effect or spell on the stack, it's combination counterspell and stifle.  If your opponent does try to get tricky on the stack (or if you can lure him into a stackwar by responding to his spell or effect somehow), you can abuse him.

Clearing the stack (could you counter combat damage, too?) seems a bit much for 3.

Of course the current intent seems to be not rack and ruin, but another confound, ie something the worst 10% of players will include in their limited decks (once).  Then again, UU cost makes it unwieldy for limited.  Even half the bad players will realize that, so maybe just 5%.  Maybe if we want something interesting, it should go to a new thread.

[Jacob Orlove]

Wait, how is Confound bad in limited?

[Machinus]

You just argued against your case. 'Nigh' means 'close', or, 'almost'.
That being said, it would be easy to get two abilities on the stack, yes.

Pronunciation: 'sär-"ka-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: French or Late Latin; French sarcasme, from Late Latin sarcasmos, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein to tear flesh, bite the lips in rage, sneer, from sark-, sarx flesh; probably akin to Avestan thwar&s- to cut
1 : a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain <tired of continual sarcasms>
2 a : a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b : the use or language of sarcasm <this is no time to indulge insarcasm>

[TheWellknownBrownie]

You'll have to forgive me, it is very difficult to recognize misused sarcasm on the internet. That aside, care to adress any of the more relevant points in this little sub-conversation?

[brianb]

Sorry, I didn't mean confound.  I meant fatigue.  An example of a stupid card whose existance was justified by saying it was skill-testing, ie bad players would play it in limited.

[Matt]

This isn't all that bad. I could see this being a sideboard card in block, and it has much better uses in Multiplayer.

[Matt]

Twenty-four hour clock, unless someone thinks this name sounds too childish.

[Matt]

Last chance! I fear this may have been hidden by the closings.

[Matt]

Closed and added.[/color]